221 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

Only in Tevinter. In southern Thedas the Chantry created the Circles as an alternative to genociding all mages, which is what some Chantry folk wanted to do but they realized they needed some spare mages for Blights.

The Circles were created in general because Kordillus Drakon showed the Chantry that mages were valuable in protecting humanity.  Specifically, during the Second Blight, yes.  The Circles were created as much to protect and train mages as to watch over them.  The Inquisition protected mages as much as anyone else in those days.

 

Also in those days there was no northern and southern Chantry.  It was all the same thing.

[MisterJB]

The point these people make is that the mages wouldn't resort to these foolishness if the templars didn't drove them to desperate acts.

Ok, let's accept for a second mages aren't susceptible to temptation like "lesser" men.

You're still saying that mages need to a trouble free life in order not to kill or sell out people. And there are a thousand different things that cause suffering and that are not Templars.

 

Not aways done hidden thought. Meredith had an squad that openly murdered defenseless civilians for showing symphaty to mages. Again, never held ACCOUNTABLE and it took Hawke to kill them.

In a leaderless city where the Templar numbers were more numerous than anywhere else in the Free Marches, the Veil was paper thin and the Knight Commander had her mind corrupted by Red Lyrium.

Not exactly replicable conditions.

 

 

Maybe we never saw mages policing themselves because the Chantry never gave them an chance to start with.

It's not like they can't do that from within the system. Investigate, interrogate, inquire, report crimes and suspicions to Templars, participate in Apostate hunts, etc.

And the Collective could have set up a better system than placing a request on a bag and hoping someone felt like doing it. Or investigate strange requests of which there were many in DAO.

And Fiona could have easily dealt with the breakaways threatening the people of the Hinterlands.
and the Tevinters could plain and simply police each other.

 

If you give them freedom by divine Leliana, guess what? They are doing well enough without coming to blows with the common people.

We're really using a single line of one epilogue as evidence that a 2000 year old ethnic conflict was solved by one person with words?

 

I was not talking about an alliance, but conscription.

And you also didn't answer who exactly is benefited by such an arrangement.

[The Baconer]

In a leaderless city where the Templar numbers were more numerous than anywhere else in the Free Marches, the Veil was paper thin and the Knight Commander had her mind corrupted by Red Lyrium.

Not exactly replicable conditions.

 

Replicable in the sense that the organization expected to stop that kind of thing from happening did nothing about it. But the Seekers are dead now, so here's to a new beginning.

[The Baconer]

Maybe we never saw mages policing themselves because the Chantry never gave them an chance to start with.

 

The Rivaini Chantry actually allowed the Seers to retain their traditions, and freedom, in exchange for aiding the Templars when called upon.

 

But, again, Seekers muck it up.

[KaiserShep]

In a leaderless city where the Templar numbers were more numerous than anywhere else in the Free Marches, the Veil was paper thin and the Knight Commander had her mind corrupted by Red Lyrium.

Not exactly replicable conditions.

 

I don't suppose it would be beneficial to society to replicate the ridiculously bad planning of Kirkwall. Like sure, have a Circle of magi in the middle of a major city in the Free Marches, where escapees could conveniently slip away into its bowels.

[Jaison1986]

 

Ok, let's accept for a second mages aren't susceptible to temptation like "lesser" men.

You're still saying that mages need to a trouble free life in order not to kill or sell out people. And there are a thousand different things that cause suffering and that are not Templars.

 

In a leaderless city where the Templar numbers were more numerous than anywhere else in the Free Marches, the Veil was paper thin and the Knight Commander had her mind corrupted by Red Lyrium.

Not exactly replicable conditions.

 

It's not like they can't do that from within the system. Investigate, interrogate, inquire, report crimes and suspicions to Templars, participate in Apostate hunts, etc.

And the Collective could have set up a better system than placing a request on a bag and hoping someone felt like doing it. Or investigate strange requests of which there were many in DAO.

And Fiona could have easily dealt with the breakaways threatening the people of the Hinterlands.
and the Tevinters could plain and simply police each other.

 

We're really using a single line of one epilogue as evidence that a 2000 year old ethnic conflict was solved by one person with words?

 

And you also didn't answer who exactly is benefited by such an arrangement.

 

 

Oh right, only mages can kill and sell people, obviously, Castillion and Isabela are mages too! The final point is that you are cherry picking on the mages when the mundane are absolutely no better then them. 

 

Interesting, you consider Kirkwall to be an special case, but when time magic itself is used to trick the mages, is not an special case at all?

 

The Collective uses the exact same system as the Chantry board, how come you don't complain about that too?

 

Again, Ser Barris doesn't bother to hunt down the templars unleashing mayhem in the hinterlands. Why is Fiona the only one you complain about?

 

You forget that in this scenario the mages help the Inquisition save the world. The people now see them as heroes. This conflict is of the Chantry making anyway. Rather then teach the people to understand, they teach them to fear. You think Connor or Meredith sister would have happened if the people weren't terrified of the circle? And to lose their children to them? What parent would fear to send their child to the college of enchanter or the bright hand? An place of learning and good reputation.

 

Everybody benefits for this arrengement. The circle is under someone's supervision rather then completely loose, while the mages are being watched over by an organization much more resonable when compared to the templars.

[thesuperdarkone2]

Oh right, only mages can kill and sell people, obviously, Castillion and Isabela are mages too! The final point is that you are cherry picking on the mages when the mundane are absolutely no better then them. 

 

Interesting, you consider Kirkwall to be an special case, but when time magic itself is used to trick the mages, is not an special case at all?

 

The Collective uses the exact same system as the Chantry board, how come you don't complain about that too?

 

Again, Ser Barris doesn't bother to hunt down the templars unleashing mayhem in the hinterlands. Why is Fiona the only one you complain about?

 

You forget that in this scenario the mages help the Inquisition save the world. The people now see them as heroes. This conflict is of the Chantry making anyway. Rather then teach the people to understand, they teach them to fear. You think Connor or Meredith sister would have happened if the people weren't terrified of the circle? And to lose their children to them? What parent would fear to send their child to the college of enchanter or the bright hand? An place of learning and good reputation.

 

Everybody benefits for this arrengement. The circle is under someone's supervision rather then completely loose, while the mages are being watched over by an organization much more resonable when compared to the templars.

This. For instance, what possible reason is there for telling mages they can never have children and if they do, they can never raise them and will never see them again. Wynne's story of her son being taken away from her is one reason I can never support the Circles. Plus, if the Circles aren't things to be feared, things like Connor or Meredith's sister won't occur as the College will likely be more accepting and friendlier than the Templars.

[MisterJB]

Oh right, only mages can kill and sell people, obviously, Castillion and Isabela are mages too! The final point is that you are cherry picking on the mages when the mundane are absolutely no better then them. 

How does that relate in any way to the first point of my post?

 

Interesting, you consider Kirkwall to be an special case, but when time magic itself is used to trick the mages, is not an special case at all?

The trick here being "We'll go back in time to ask them before they ask the Inquisition."

So, even if Alexius hadn't used time magic, all he had to do was make a proposal.

 

The Collective uses the exact same system as the Chantry board, how come you don't complain about that too?

For one, the Chantry boards has missions like "find a sextant...kill bears...bring me pieces of undead."

The Collective has missions which involve stopping Abominations and Blood Mage. Both of those require timely intervention.

 

Again, Ser Barris doesn't bother to hunt down the templars unleashing mayhem in the hinterlands. Why is Fiona the only one you complain about?

If you start a rebellion on the ground that mages can be trusted to police themselves then you sure as hell police your mages when needed which she fails completely do because it's not convenient.

The mistakes of the Templars do not excuse this.

 

You forget that in this scenario the mages help the Inquisition save the world. The people now see them as heroes.

No.

I'm sorry but the world doesn't work that way.
Remember how the Warden or Garahel being city elves didn't change a damn thing? That is the real world.

How many times have the mages helped fought the Bligths? And what long term effects did that have?

When all is said and done, the people will remember that the Divine was killed by magic, that Corypheus was a mage, that the mages invited Tevinter to Ferelden, that they started a rebellion which led to war and that will be all.

 

Rather then teach the people to understand, they teach them to fear. 

People do not need to be taught to fear others which can kill them with their minds. 

The Chantry tells people the truth and the truth is that mages are dangerous.

 

Quite frankly, the Chantry is the natural reaction of a people that formed nations in order to escape the tyranny of magic. It did not develop in a vacuum, it is, ultimately, a response to a thousand years of magic being used to hurt normal people.

 

You think Connor or Meredith sister would have happened if the people weren't terrified of the circle? And to lose their children to them? What parent would fear to send their child to the college of enchanter or the bright hand? An place of learning and good reputation.

If out of ten mages, two are hidden, then that is two mages that are a threat to people.

If ten out of ten are amidst the normal population, then that is ten mages that are a threat to people. 

The math here is very clear. I would much rather risk a couple of kids slipping between the net than having nothing but goodwill and conscience keeping people safe from mages.

 

Everybody benefits for this arrengement. The circle is under someone's supervision rather then completely loose, while the mages are being watched over by an organization much more resonable when compared to the templars.

Right, forgetting for a moment there are like a thousand different Inquisitions, there is plain and simply no outline whatsoever at any point in the game of just how the Inquisition intends to control the mages going into the future. That is assuming there is a future for the Inquisition. I could see an alliance of nations rising to tear it down if it grows much more powerful.

At best, we have some suggestions in dialogue with Vivienne.

 

If said system provides as much security as the Circle system did, then it must function in a manner very similar in which case, the mages are back to where they were. If if it is less safe, then the mages are benefiting at the expense of the normal people.

 

[MisterJB]

This. For instance, what possible reason is there for telling mages they can never have children and if they do, they can never raise them and will never see them again.

1-Emotions are dangerous for mages and parents do crazy things for their children.

2-Circle towers are not places where kids should grow up.

3-What if the kid is a non-mage? Then, s/he'll have spent childhood there for no reason and will absolutely no connections whatsoever with the outside world and will not have been taught a trade to survive making their life that much harder.

4-Such children would most likely become Templars but since they would have mage parents, it could lead to them being unable to perform necessary duties such as presiding over Harrowings.

5-Overpopulation would lead to a need for Circle towers to be expanded.

6-A larger population is harder to control.

[MisterJB]

Replicable in the sense that the organization expected to stop that kind of thing from happening did nothing about it. But the Seekers are dead now, so here's to a new beginning.

They did nothing about it because they felt the overabundance of demons and blood mages justified Meredith's actions which was a result of the Veil being particularly thin around Kirkwall.

[thesuperdarkone2]

They did nothing about it because they felt the overabundance of demons and blood mages justified Meredith's actions which was a result of the Veil being particularly thin around Kirkwall.

And what possible justifications were there for the death squads killing NONMAGES? or the fact that Meredith essentially usurped power? or the fact that Meredith made mages tranquil illegally for things such as passing love notes?

 

Considering it was Lambert who was in charge, I think it was obviously just him just supporting mage cruelty.

[KaiserShep]

Taking siege of Kirkwall's government alone is kind of worth ousting the Templars. They should not be running a city's government. That's not what their order was meant to do. They act more like an occupying force than a part of its inner workings.

[The Baconer]

They did nothing about it because they felt the overabundance of demons and blood mages justified Meredith's actions which was a result of the Veil being particularly thin around Kirkwall.

 

I know why they did nothing about it, they were just wrong and incompetent.

[thesuperdarkone2]

1-Emotions are dangerous for mages and parents do crazy things for their children.

2-Circle towers are not places where kids should grow up.

3-What if the kid is a non-mage? Then, s/he'll have spent childhood there for no reason and will absolutely no connections whatsoever with the outside world and will not have been taught a trade to survive making their life that much harder.

4-Such children would most likely become Templars but since they would have mage parents, it could lead to them being unable to perform necessary duties such as presiding over Harrowings.

5-Overpopulation would lead to a need for Circle towers to be expanded.

6-A larger population is harder to control.

1- A mage might be more willing to remain calm if their child was at stake. Also, a mage child might be more calm if their own parents were there to raise them

 

2- You forget that if the child turns out to be a mage they are placed in a completely different circle and told that they will never see their parents ever again. Look at Rhys and Wynne. You also forget that regular mage children are also raised in the circles

 

3- That is still no reason to essentially remove them from their parents. The chantry also presses the non-mages into service. What if the child wanted to be a baker, a smith, or some other job that didn't involve the chantry? Their only options are to become priests or templars. Would you like it if you were in an orphanage and you were told your only future was to be a priest or take a dangerously addictive substance

 

4- Then why not at least let them meet their parents? They don't have to be in the same circles. At least let them know or at least write to each other but no, all contact is cut

 

5- Then why are new mages being brought into circles? New mages are born everyday so inevitable the population will get to big anyway if mages continue to be brought in

 

6- See 5.

[Jaison1986]

 

How does that relate in any way to the first point of my post?

 

The trick here being "We'll go back in time to ask them before they ask the Inquisition."

So, even if Alexius hadn't used time magic, all he had to do was make a proposal.

 

For one, the Chantry boards has missions like "find a sextant...kill bears...bring me pieces of undead."

The Collective has missions which involve stopping Abominations and Blood Mage. Both of those require timely intervention.

 

If you start a rebellion on the ground that mages can be trusted to police themselves then you sure as hell police your mages when needed which she fails completely do because it's not convenient.

The mistakes of the Templars do not excuse this.

 

No.

I'm sorry but the world doesn't work that way.
Remember how the Warden or Garahel being city elves didn't change a damn thing? That is the real world.

How many times have the mages helped fought the Bligths? And what long term effects did that have?

When all is said and done, the people will remember that the Divine was killed by magic, that Corypheus was a mage, that the mages invited Tevinter to Ferelden, that they started a rebellion which led to war and that will be all.

 

People do not need to be taught to fear others which can kill them with their minds. 

The Chantry tells people the truth and the truth is that mages are dangerous.

 

Quite frankly, the Chantry is the natural reaction of a people that formed nations in order to escape the tyranny of magic. It did not develop in a vacuum, it is, ultimately, a response to a thousand years of magic being used to hurt normal people.

 

If out of ten mages, two are hidden, then that is two mages that are a threat to people.

If ten out of ten are amidst the normal population, then that is ten mages that are a threat to people. 

The math here is very clear. I would much rather risk a couple of kids slipping between the net than having nothing but goodwill and conscience keeping people safe from mages.

 

Right, forgetting for a moment there are like a thousand different Inquisitions, there is plain and simply no outline whatsoever at any point in the game of just how the Inquisition intends to control the mages going into the future. That is assuming there is a future for the Inquisition. I could see an alliance of nations rising to tear it down if it grows much more powerful.

At best, we have some suggestions in dialogue with Vivienne.

 

If said system provides as much security as the Circle system did, then it must function in a manner very similar in which case, the mages are back to where they were. If if it is less safe, then the mages are benefiting at the expense of the normal people.

 

 

 

Have it your way. I get the feeling that mages could bring Thedas to an new golden age and that still wouldn't change your mind. But unlike you, I'm not unresonable, I'm willing to change my save if my outcome regarding mages is not an beneficial one. 

[ElementalFury106]

How? I really think conscription is for the best, but I really don't wanna lose Halamshiral's Amulet of Power for the Inquisitor

 

And I really don't want Vivienne as Divine.

 

Here's EXACTLY what I did

 

>Conscripted Mages

>Follow up convo with Vivienne said "Mages need the Chantry"

>Convo with Cassandra said "Chantry needs reform"

>Allied with Wardens

>Celene rules, peace with Gaspard and Briala

>Supported Cassandra post Winter Palace "...You'd make an excellent Divine"

>Supported Cassandra in Vivienne's Divine conversation when she says Cassandra is the best choice "I agree"

>Did war table operation supporting Cassandra

 

Conscripting the Mages supports Cassandra as well, not just Vivienne. But you have to express Mages needing the Chantry, the Chantry needing reform, and pledging open support for Cassandra. Otherwise, Vivienne will get the title.

[Steelcan]

1- A mage might be more willing to remain calm if their child was at stake. Also, a mage child might be more calm if their own parents were there to raise them

*looks at Alexius*

 

*back at post*

 

*back at Alexius*

 

*raises eyebrow*

[Lumix19]

*looks at Alexius*
 
*back at post*
 
*back at Alexius*
 
*raises eyebrow*

Fair point. I don't agree with children being taken away from their parents just because they are Mages but fair point.

[Karlone123]

The timing is wrong. At this point they are being given refuge in Redcliffe - you know, the place that Cullen says has never fallen to assault? Seems a weird time to think - Hmm, we're protected here but you know let's join Tevinter, become enslaved again, and evict the Arl and his people so they can be slaughtered by the extremist rebel mages and templars that are tearing up the Hinterlands. This is our best course of action....

 

No Fiona, it's not.

 

I liked Queen Anora's/King Alistair's anger towards the mages. "Get yo' magic,Tevinter-allying asses out our country"

[Vicious]

Ignoring personal feelings, Conscripting makes the most sense and the dialogue of the scene fits far better.

 

You had just went through hell because of the mages and you say "We would be fools to trust you." And yes, you would be a fool, just like Teagan was when he opened his doors in good faith and was ousted from his own castle.

[Kurt M.]

Here's EXACTLY what I did

 

>Conscripted Mages

>Follow up convo with Vivienne said "Mages need the Chantry"

>Convo with Cassandra said "Chantry needs reform"

>Allied with Wardens

>Celene rules, peace with Gaspard and Briala

>Supported Cassandra post Winter Palace "...You'd make an excellent Divine"

>Supported Cassandra in Vivienne's Divine conversation when she says Cassandra is the best choice "I agree"

>Did war table operation supporting Cassandra

 

Conscripting the Mages supports Cassandra as well, not just Vivienne. But you have to express Mages needing the Chantry, the Chantry needing reform, and pledging open support for Cassandra. Otherwise, Vivienne will get the title.

 

I guess you don't know, but....would that work if the peace is made only between Briala and Celene? I think you get a different War Table operation if the three of them make peace (thus no Amulet of Power?).

[MisterJB]

Fair point. I don't agree with children being taken away from their parents just because they are Mages but fair point.

Even Malcolm Hawke used blood magic when his wife and unborn child were threatened.
It as for a good cause but what if it hadn't been?

[Lumix19]

Even Malcolm Hawke used blood magic when his wife and unborn child were threatened.
It as for a good cause but what if it hadn't been?

I thought Malcolm was actually a good example considering he raised Bethany (and a mage Hawke) without any problems. And quite a few parents will do bad things to protect their children, except in the case of mages they have to constantly worry about whether their children will get taken away. Perhaps if that threat wasn't there...

[Akkos]

I thought Malcolm was actually a good example considering he raised Bethany (and a mage Hawke) without any problems. And quite a few parents will do bad things to protect their children, except in the case of mages they have to constantly worry about whether their children will get taken away. Perhaps if that threat wasn't there...

 

Do you know Malcolm is a retired circle mage...........     He knows about magic and could take care of his kids.  

 

What about children who are born in a non-magical family. Like Connor's, The orphanage in Denerim......  Chateau in Emerald graves?..

[Lumix19]

Do you know Malcolm is a retired circle mage........... He knows about magic and could take care of his kids.

What about children who are born in a non-magical family. Like Connor's, The orphanage in Denerim...... Chateau in Emerald graves?..

The point is that there is no real reason to take away the children of mages. And in those cases I don't see why you can't have a tutor if the parents are unwilling to let the child go.